Mixing Moralism with Medicine; I was Refused the Pill from my Family Doctor.

– UL student Úna Roddy writes about the shocking level of judgement and unprofessionalism she experienced when trying to get a prescription for ‘The Pill’ from her family doctor.

Picture a doctor in your mind. For most people it’s a blank, but friendly, face you can throw your symptoms at and they will make you all better. Occasionally you need to show them something embarrassing, but it’s okay because we all know that they’re not really “people” regardless of what Grey’s Anatomy tells us. They are Doctors, capital D. The white coat stands for impartial, knowledgeable and non-judgemental advice that you don’t get anywhere else. But in the immortal words of Spiderman, with great power comes great responsibility; few people in our modern society hold the kind of untouchable power of a Doctor.

Like 100 million women worldwide I am on The Pill. Getting the contraceptive pill wasn’t taboo, I went to the Doctors in my college, they asked me some questions and handed me a prescription. Wham, bam, thank you ma’am. I even did the unthinkable and broached the subject with my mother. I told her I was going on it and she was in total support, declaring she wasn’t ready to be a glamorous granny just yet. Also in the student lifestyle, whether right or wrong, it is more of a controversy to not be on the pill. So, in my very liberal mind frame I was sent home for the summer to the rural backwaters of the west of Ireland.

Women have been using the contraceptive pill to control their reproduction for decades.

It came to July and my previous prescriptions had run out. So I made an appointment with my local GP, in the anti-metropolis. My natural instinct was to bring up the subject of contraception with a brass neck and a little bit of a blush, after all Doctor X has nursed me from all manner of sniffles and snuffles since I was a child. The onslaught of judgement was so unexpected and severe that it literally took my breath away.

Dr X began by assuming I had a boyfriend if I wanted to go on the pill, when in fact my relationship status is none of his business or anybody else’s. He didn’t seem to understand the fact that this is the 21st century and my contraception and my relationship status are two completely unrelated things. He then went on to declare that “co habiting” (he made little quotation marks with his hands) couples had a higher rate of break ups than married couples. He also threw in the fact that ‘fellas’ often experience so much they don’t know what to settle for. Aside from the fact that I’m not something to settle for, it really didn’t seem to register that I was having sex because I wanted to – not because my imaginary boyfriend did.

“I hope you’re not engaging in some sort of ‘fornication’ now are you?”

I felt so affronted by this blatantly sexist and archaic comment I just had to ask what the hell this had to do with my contraception. He immediately backtracked and threw statistics at me about how the majority of UK Doctors wouldn’t prescribe their wives the pill; and how it could lead into the whole abortion debate. With this he lit my ever short fuse and I stated in no uncertain terms my extremely clear pro-choice views on abortion and how the pill had nothing to do with it. My doctor attacked my views as outdated and immature. In my defence I stated that I didn’t care what he thought, because they were my views and had nothing to do with him. He simply stated I was just wrong.

I’m generally stubborn to a fault, but in coming up against this wall of judgemental criticism so unexpectedly, I just gave in and left the surgery. His parting words were “I hope I’ve given you something to think about” I replied rather tartly “Not at all”. I was in complete shock for the first while, with a thin veil of rage. But as they both wore off I started to analyse every word said in the surgery, something that kept coming up alongside his refusal to administer the pill was “But I don’t want you to get pregnant”. My response was, naturally, well then give me the pill. The intense message that was conveyed was that I shouldn’t be having sex, in a committed relationship or not. In this day and age when the media is saturated with sex and teenagers are having sex ever younger surely the message to a consenting adult should be ‘be safe’ rather than ‘be ashamed’? Sex is completely natural thing, yet this trusted medical practitioner made me feel ashamed rather than responsible for protecting myself.

This horrible catholic guilt regarding our own sexuality still festers in the more rural parts of Ireland. It makes me furious that the general psyche of our nation would accept that a doctor reserves the right not to administer this drug. I had done three courses of the pill, I was well aware of the risks and consequences and I am a consenting adult choosing to be responsible; yet the doctor still asked were my parents aware of why I was there.

It occurred to me, while filling the forms in for my new doctor, what if I had been going in there a younger, more impressionable girl trying to do the responsible thing? Having sat through the tirade that was directed at me I think I can confirm that a less stubborn girl would have probably never had the confidence to ask for contraception again. This seemed so dangerous to me that I felt the need to out my contraception problems, very publicly. The very idea of this betrayal of power and how Dr X’s refusal to administer the pill can come under the umbrella of ‘religious beliefs’ made me so angry I couldn’t keep this story to myself.

I don’t care if the world knows I’m on the pill. Or that I’m having sex. What I do care about is the fact that people like Dr X remain in their unquestionable position of authority. I care that I’m not allowed to name him in this article because he’s still my family’s doctor. Even my very liberal mother saw nothing wrong with a doctor refusing to administer a drug that I had already been on and was taking under full knowledge of the consequences. Her attitude of ‘Doctor Knows Best’ makes me incredibly angry. This tendency to never question figures of authority has caused so much trouble in regard to the Catholic Church and our corrupt politicians, yet still prevails. I am a consenting adult having sex, and nobody reserves the right to pass judgement on me.

GPs are allowed to refuse to prescribe the pill but they are not allowed to impose their beliefs on you or treat you in any way that suggests disapproval of your actions. They are also supposed to refer you to a service that will provide you with the pill. If a doctor refuses to provide a prescription for emergency contraceptive pills and will not provide you with a referral, you can make a complaint to the Medical Council [complaints@mcirl.ie]. You can also make a complaint if you feel they imposed their beliefs on you or treated you with disapproval. I would strongly urge you to do so.

name that doctor and remove his medical licence now. no need speak to a patient like that first of all and we are all told in med school if you cant do something like this because of your own morals you MUST refer the patient to another doctor who can.

Your doctor behaved disgracefully. He has no business saying those things to you. And as you said, he is probably saying them to every young woman who is unlucky enough to be stuck with him as her family GP.

I know that in a smaller community people really don’t want to make trouble, but I want to second prochoicedoc’s suggestion about reporting him. I’m glad that you are able to see what an egregious abuse of his position this was and to dismiss him as the arrogant and small-minded d*ck he is.

Thank you for posting this Una I experienced something similar when I returned to Ireland from the UK. I was on the pill over there and expected my family doctor to renew my prescription when it ran out and I was met the with their practices religious ethos. At the time I didn’t pursue it as the pill was affecting my cholesterol so technically coming off it was better for my health and as I was not sexually active at the time I did not mind or pursue but I always felt it was not a professional attitude and was not sure if I wanted to go back on the pill how I would proceed. I am also not Catholic so I definitely felt I shouldn’t have religious doctrine forced on me in the 21st century. Thank you for highlighting this issue I am glad I was not the only person facing this. Ireland can be very backwards on women’s issues and the abortion one has certainly brought this to light.

The situation described was most unfortunate and his behaviour highly improfessional.

However, with “I felt so affronted by this blatantly sexist” the author is unfair (at least based on what is stated in the post). Being anti-sex/-fornication or anti-premarital-sex is not sexism—nor are very many other uses seen in the blogosphere.

Further, I do not see anything wrong with his refusing the prescription, but only with the speech-making. A right to refuse actions that we consider unethical is fundamental, even being a valid ground to not follow orders in the military forces of many western countries. (Of course, I would in turn have seen myself free to refuse payment for the session.)

As an aside, the influence and status of “Doctors” (a term I do not like to apply unless I see an actual doctorate—and none of that U.S. professional doctorate nonsense) has declined considerably over time in many countries. It may or may not be different in Ireland, but if I had written the above, I would have dropped the whole authority/trust theme and focused on professionalism. In doubt “a younger, more impressionable girl trying to do the responsible thing” would often have been vulnerable to e.g a nurse too.

In fairness, rather than the anti-sex vire, this is the comment I believe she was referring to as sexist:

” He also threw in the fact that ‘fellas’ often experience so much they don’t know what to settle for.”

And, I agree it is sexist. I do also agree with your statement that a lot of things on the ‘blogosphere’ which are called sexist actually aren’t, but there is also a very reactionary view that denies values accusations of sexism because they aren’t blatant enough – the most damaging and pervasive forms of sexism don’t tend to be categorically negative or dismissive stereotyping. Here the GP us implying a very sexist (and as the author also said, archaic) view if how relationships work, who is in control, and how both the author’s hypotheic partner will have his desire for a long-term relationship affected by sex. He’s not only implying a male-dominant relationship, he’s also stating that men are prevented from thinking clearly it responsibly because they have penises – so I don’t think either sex is coming off well in this GP’s estimation.

The statement is a bit unclear and hard to interpret, but there is no particular reason to see anything sexist in it. On the contrary, it could conceivably be a very accurate and insightful observation:

In days gone by, the eventual wife (and vice versa husband) was often a first or only sex partner, the overall choice of reasonably nearby and equal age potential partners may have been limited to just a handful of people for someone living in a small village, etc. Today, pre-marital sex is plentiful, most of us live in big cities and can see hundreds of potential partners during a twenty minute walk, etc.

Correspondingly, “the one” is likely to be a lot less special. To make an analogy: To save space, I am in the process of putting my many DVDs in binders and throwing the original cases away. Doing so, I have encountered many newer DVDs that I have watched once or twice after buying them for 5–8 Euro per piece. I have also encountered a few that I bought around 2000, for much higher prices, and which I once had watched half-a-dozen times in the first year of possession. The very first movie I bought, Jackie Chan’s “Nice Guy”, is far less worthy than some of the aforementioned newer DVDs (in fact, I would go as far as calling it third-rate)—yet I have seen it on a number of occassions and raw nostalgia almost kept me from throwing the cover away. Rarity raises our appreciation; abundance reduces it—a simple fact of life and human nature.

As for being archaic: This is independent from being sexist. It may or may not overlap, but is simply a different issue. For that matter, not everything archaic is necessarily and automatically wrong or inferior to more modern ways.

As for your further interpretations: I have not re-analysed the post, but skimming through it, your interpretations seem to be largely speculation about what he ment. Such speculation is extremely dangerous and quite likely to inadvertently put more or different words in the mouth of the speaker than is fair. My advice is to stick strictly to what is being said and to apply Hanlon’s Razor. (I have been on the receiving end of such over- and misinterpretation on a good many occasions and can vouch for it being a problem.)

As an aside, not all statements pointing to “traditional” roles need be wrong or even worthy of remark (I stress that I am not saying that the above belongs in this category). For instance, the factual observation that men and women, on average, for some reason or other, tend to adapt certain roles relative each other is unremarkable. On the other hand, if someone says that those who deviate from this average behaviour are, by this fact alone, worthy of moral condemnation, then we have something that can be remarked upon. Unfortunately, even such observations as the former are often condemned as sexism in e.g. the blogosphere—and to even suggest the possibility that a part of the explanation is biological can cause some irrational people to implode.

[…] An Irish university student goes on the pill. She tells her mother; her mother is fine with it. Then she goes home to the west of Ireland, and has to renew her prescription. Her local GP is not so fine with it. He asks her a lot of impertinent questions and gives her a lot of unwanted advice. […]